After early delays due to a snub by a camera part supplier and issued with the anodized finish on the black model, HTC Corp. (TPE:2498) is starting to see sales of its HTC One 1080p flagship Android smartphonepick up steam. But in the face of growing employee defections and failures of other key products, HTC still appears to be in very bad trouble.

I. First is a Flop

The smartphone industry is one of tech business's most viciously competitive sectors and is not for the faint of heart. HTC bet big with its HTC First, and it appears to have lost big.

After a much-hyped April launch event, partner Facebook, Inc. (FB) promised HTC a period of exclusivity on its Android reskin "Home", which the HTC First comes preloaded with. Such exclusivity could have given some customers incentive to buy the HTC First. Instead, Facebook went back on its original plan, releasing the reskin to HTC's competitors like Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930).

In addition to the exclusivity loss, Facebook's Home suffered horrible reviews from Android users who complained that it was clunky and at times nonfunctional -- nothing like the slick appearance Facebook gave in its media preview. Sales of the HTC First have been nonexistent, as evidenced by the recent price cut from $99 USD to 99 cents. A source close to the company tellsThe Verge that the hyped handset has been "a disaster".

That said, the situation at HTC is rumored to be struggling to pay top engineers and marketers the top salaries that its more-successful rivals are offering. One source close to HTC's user design unit, led by Drew Bamford in Washington State, tells The Verge, "Anyone who's heard of them in Seattle doesn't want to go work for them right now. They're like T-Mobile two years ago. They're in utter freefall."

HTC's Chief Product Officer, Kouji Kodera, reportedly quit the company last week. Other recent departures include Jason Gordon, the company's vice president of global communications, global retail marketing manager Rebecca Rowland, director of digital marketing John Starkweather, and product strategy manager Eric Lin. And we’ve just learned that HTC Asia CEO Lennard Hoornik has also left the company.

Mr. Lin and Ms. Rowland have joined Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) while Mr. Starkweather has joined AT&T, Inc.'s (T) ranks. Mr. Lin fired a parting shot at his former employer, writing:

To all my friends still at @htc - just quit. leave now. it’s tough to do, but you’ll be so much happier, I swear.

It's unclear whether it’s the cause of or effect of the departure, but HTC's Marketing CMO Ho is reportedly preparing to transfer the marketing and product development departments back to Taiwan (from Seattle, Washington).

Ultimately, some industry observers question if HTC can continue to compete. Apple, Inc. (AAPL) is king of supply negotiations and has pricing and parts inventory flexibility that HTC can't hope to match. Plus it has its own international retail footprint dedicated exclusively to marketing its products. HTC doesn't have that.

Likewise Samsung has unique advantages of its own -- via its displayand processor units it makes much of its own hardware. If Samsung needs a component, in most cases it doesn't have to rely on volatile suppliers -- it can simply make it itself and pocket the savings. Again, HTC lacks this kind of capability.

HTC could take a page from Nokia's book in its recovery. [Image Source: AFP]

Apple, aka the World's Greatest Patent Troll, probably inflicted the mortal wound to HTC when they convinced a judge to put an embargo on HTC products a while ago. That left HTC reeling in a world of hurt, even though eventually the import ban was lifted.

You don't have to win a court battle to win a war. You just have to inflict enough damage to make your opponent limp off the field, maybe to die a while later.

AMD may yet die from the wound Intel inflicted on it many years ago when they got caught doing various illegal things like blackmailing major OEMs to not use AMD processors. Back in the day when AMD *should* have been cleaning Intel's clock with fundamentally better product, Intel's criminal activities shut the door on them. The billion-dollar penalty Intel eventually had to pay AMD really didn't matter - chump change to Intel, but they'd achieved their goal...they killed off AMD's chance to make big headway in marketshare long enough to counter them on the product front, and AMD has been walking wounded ever since. You could make a reasonable argument that AMD would have died already if not for the ATI acquisition. And even that may not save them in the long run.

It all goes to show that you don't have to "win" everything you do in order to get the ultimate result you wanted. Apple didn't succeed in getting HTC's products permantently banned...and Intel got caught red-handed in serious criminal activities. Neither Apple nor Intel were hurt by the actions, though...while their opponents may yet go bankrupt from them.

Exactly. HTC's pain started LAST spring (2012) when the One S and One V were held by customs for a month before the crates were eventually released to retailers because of a bogus Apple claim that was eventually overturned. It didn't start to become available in mainstream retail until the Galaxy S3 was available.

HTC should have sued Apple for irreparable damages inflicted by the embargo as this completely screwed up their momentum.

oh stfu and gtfo, troll. I have the HTC One, and I had the One X. And the S 3. All are good phones. But the HTC One wipes the floor with the Galaxy S IV, and everything prior. HTC Isn't struggling with making good phones, is't struggling with competing with Samsung's immense marketing budget, and Apples ludicrous patent troll lawsuits.

I haven't followed the HTC vs Apple lawsuit, but somehow having one's product banned seems at a different level than Samsung's lies, the later is usually called marketing strategy.

I don't think HTC and Samsung were major competitors before, or not that I've really noticed. HTC was the major player, while Samsung was still a bit player, but I don't think that HTC's major past problems were because of Samsung. HTC coasted and the banning hurt them severely, their current problems of the competition with Samsung, as Samsung is the major player while HTC is now the bit player. I think HTC's banning and their own inertia made them a bit player today.

I'd really hate to see HTC disappear from the market, as they have a very promising device now, and it is a very nice alternative to Samsung.

You see the key word, major? I never said they were not competitors but HTC at the time were at the top of the heap and Samsung was basically at the bottom of the heap. HTC had other major competitors, Apple, Blackberry, Nokia. Samsung was just another small bit player in making low end phones back then. Did you see any marketing done comparing an HTC phone and Samsung at the time, I sure didn't. So what about the LGs, Sanyos, Huawei, and all the other brands that were sitting in the phone shop at the time, they were all major competitors to HTC?

quote: HTC dug it's own grave by releasing uninspired models for far too long. It should have released a product like the One two years ago.

That's just opinion. It's an irrefutable fact that they were massively injured by the import ban.

quote: Intel has whipped AMD since the release of the Core processors.

You've just solidified my point. Intel's criminal activity hamstrung AMD during the time period in which AMD was not only the price leader, but also the product leader. The crimes bought Intel the time they needed to wake the f%ck up and start putting out better product. So AMD was denied the ability to truly make hay during their glory years.

The pattern that is evident is that bad behavior on the part of industry heavyweights, like Apple and Intel, can reap massive rewards for them...even when they "lose" the initial battle. Apple didn't get the permanent ban on HTC they wanted - didn't matter, the outcome is the same. Intel got caught in a number of illegal dealings and had to pay AMD a billion dollars. Didn't matter - the damage was done and AMD was robbed of the chance to take big marketshare.

One can say that no good deed goes unpunished...it may very well be that no bad deed goes unrewarded too.

You mean Intel had more capital than AMD to survive until the Core line came out? OMG how unfair!

In the end Intel had to put out a superior product or their market share would have eroded regardless of whatever marketing deals it had with major PC makers. A company can only discount an inferior product for so long before they fail.

Yes Intel had more capital to ride out the storm. So what? No one ever said life was fair.

You want to make some more excuses for AMD's drought since the Athlon 64? Go ahead.

Intel's criminal activities prevented AMD from competing on the merits of it's product. That prevented massive amounts of sales for AMD, and caused AMD to never make unknown amounts of revenue that it could have made if it wasn't for the crime Intel committed.

Revenue that AMD could have used to continue to invest in R&D. R&D that could have kept AMD in front of Intel. Not to mention gaining momentum via marketshare.

What Intel did was to blackmail the OEMs so that AMD *couldn't* generate capital. Intel already had the capital...AMD needed to generate it during that time period.

AMD was really "firing on all pistons" for a time in the early 2k's. They were first with x86 compatible 64bit CPU, first consumer dual core chip and first with on die memory controller. Those are the things that had the Athlon64 smoking the Pentium4. Since then, they just... Stopped. They have been releasing marginal improvements on that same design for almost a decade now. Intel came out with the Core2 and took back the speed crown and AMD just... did nothing.

quote: It's interesting how you never blame AMD for it's failure to put out a competitive product since the Athlon 64.

What's more interesting is that you expect them to do that while constantly operating at a loss, or very rarely a thin profit. There is a direct reason for that...Intel's criminal activity which prevented them from gaining the revenue and market position they deserved.

quote: Your transparent anyway. Like Pavlov's dog if there is an article about Apple/Intel/whatever "Big Evil" company on your $hitlist you say the same old spiel.

So your position is that it's OK for Intel to become a criminal organization, and then it's AMD's fault because Intel committed the greatest crimes ever recorded in the semiconductor industry to keep them down? Do you have the slightest idea how moronic you are?

You sir, sound like a real intel apologist. Let's be frank, Intel PAID OFF Dell, HP and others, to NOT USE AMD chips. Simple. That means that AMD didn't sell nearly as many chips as they probably would have when they were both cheaper, and performed better.

Because intel prevented AMD from MAKING MONEY, AMD had LESS MONEY to use on R&D to COMPETE with the Core etc. Once you end up behind in both product and money, it's hard to come back from. And AMD probably would never been in this situation if it weren't for intel paying off the PC OEMs. They would have made money, which would have allowed them to spend money on R&D.

Er no. What Intel did was prevent AMD from getting design wins with the likes of Dell during the Pentium4/Netburst era. Some Dell shareholders have SUED Dell for doing that.

When Intel, costs AMD revenue - which is NEEDED for R&D to develop competitive produces - then YES, Intel's actions are very wrong, illegal and non competitive.

Just before the release of Core2, AMD was actually just hitting over 20% of new computer sales. Because techies like *US* knew the AMD was a cheaper and much faster CPU over the intel. The AMD64 3200 (2.0Ghz off the top of my head) at $180 was faster at games and some other operations than the $900+ Pentium Extreme at 3.8Ghz. Only an idiot would spend that much money to SHOW OFF. **note, 20% in new sales doesn't mean 20% of total market share.

When you walked into an Office Depot or Staples and they had 10 desktop computers, 8 of them would be AMD.

Intel punched and kicked AMD in the nuts by (A) making a faster and cooler chip (B) at half the price of AMD normal price. AMD quickly had to reduce their price to even begin to compete. (Good for us, not so for AMD).

Current AMD CPUs are still about 15% slower than Intel. I am an AMD fan... but Since Core2, I bought the Core2Quad 6600 and currently an i5-3570K. Why? Faster CPU, less power, less heat and better price.

Yes, its AMD's fault since the Core2 that they have had trouble... up to a point. If they had double the budget for R&D, they could make a better chip. The CPUs they have now are still a bit of a sad joke. They basically made their own version of Netburst (high clock rates, low performance per clock) - that was a choice they made.

quote: Apple, aka the World's Greatest Patent Troll, probably inflicted the mortal wound to HTC when they convinced a judge to put an embargo on HTC products a while ago. That left HTC reeling in a world of hurt, even though eventually the import ban was lifted.

A silly, trite and juvenile analysis.

Samsung is crushing all the other Android OEMs. It is doing that because of it's tremendously powerful business model. Samsung positions itself in the supply chain of the worlds consumer tech industry building components for everybody else, this allows them to use revenues from competitors and future competitors to build up it's own hugely impressive and deep supply chain, and it allows Samsung to gather better intelligence about what it's competitors are doing and what the world's tech supply pipeline is looking like for the next couple of years. When Samsung enters a market it has the supply chain under it's control and the resources to overpower all but the strongest. And the other Android OEMs are not strong they are weak.

When Apple was using Samsung for huge chunks of it's iPhone and iPad supply chain (and from which it is only now painfully detaching itself) Samsung could see exactly what Apple was planning in terms of product scale and roll out not just a few months in advance but, given the forward planning required by markets as big as smart phones and tablets, years in advance. This is exactly the same play Samsung has used against other Android OEMs. It is the same strategy it used in other electronic markets such as TVs. It is a very, very effective strategy.

Apple will complete it's severance from any Samsung dependencies soon but it has cost the company to do so, and Apple will be a resilient opponent as Samsung manoeuvres to control the world's tech supply chain and will secure it's own supply chain. But the other Android OEMs are not as well managed as either Samsung or Apple and none of them have the financial resources or logistical management structures to resist Samsung's marketing or outbid and outplan it and Apple in the supply chain.

It's an AppleSung world. Besides Apple and Samsung all other players are bit players.

The battle is not between iOS and Android it is between Samsung and Apple. Neither will vanquish the other but they will vanquish all the rest.

I wonder what Google thinks about all this?

Google seems to be shifting it's strategy on Android anyway (hence Rubin's departure) and seems to be refocussing back on what are it's core business aim which is making sure it's services run on all platforms, at the recent Google IO Android got barely a mention. It may be that as far as Google is concerned Android has done it's job, which was preventing an alternative and dominant mobile OS from shutting out it's services, and the core development of Android can now shift into maintenance mode.

That's all very cute. However, it ignores one important fact: Apple is the one that sued HTC and got an import ban on their products. Not Samsung. That darn near killed HTC right then and there. They lost massive amounts of revenue and momentum, to the point where they were dropped to 2nd-tier status from their own suppliers. Revenue and momentum that they weren't able to recoup.

Sure...Samsung probably gobbled up the marketshare that HTC lost during that time period. But it's not Samsung's fault that HTC was locked out of the market - it's Apple's.

quote: That's all very cute. However, it ignores one important fact: Apple is the one that sued HTC and got an import ban on their products. Not Samsung. That darn near killed HTC right then and there.

No it didn't. Show me some figures for the losses incurred relative to HTC's business metrics.

quote: They lost massive amounts of revenue

Again show me some figures

quote: Sure...Samsung probably gobbled up the marketshare that HTC lost during that time period. But it's not Samsung's fault that HTC was locked out of the market - it's Apple's.

Samsung gobbled the marketshare and profits of all the Android OEMs. HTC was just part of the collective road kill, the car that hit them was Samsung.

In the end the whys and wherefores don't matter much. Now the reality is that Android as a business belongs to Samsung and the smart phone market belongs to Samsung and Apple.

Tony, I hate to burst your bubbles but the HTC One is rated as the best smartphone right now by the majority of reviewers and people alike. They just can't get it to people's hands by various problems. One of them, undeniably, is apple's ban of their product through BS lawsuits.

You are truly delusional. It was all Android development... That was by far the top thing going on there.

"It may be that as far as Google is concerned Android has done it's job, which was preventing an alternative and dominant mobile OS from shutting out it's services, and the core development of Android can now shift into maintenance mode."

LOL... Even more hilarious. So you are saying that the OS that has been upgrading and developing like crazy over the past couple of years and has brought its OS from worst to first as far as features and functionality is going into maintenance mode? If there is one thing everyone can agree on is that Android OS development has been pushing hard and fast, and going like gangbusters. FFS, what are you smoking?

Compare Google's IO vs Apple announcement of the next iteration of iOS. It shows that Apple doesn't get it that they needed something to improve upon iOS instead of flattening it's look. Google's Android development shows that they are not sitting back on their laurels and actually making it better. Apple just seems to be hovering and not "innovating". At least, Android owners have a whole slew of "innovative" things coming soon.

Does that include the 45% still stuck using Gingerbread V2, or earlier, of Android OS?

Perhaps the 'slew of innovative things' will be just for the those running the latest version 4 of Android, Jelly Bean, which has been out for nearly a year now and is only on a laughable 28% of Android devices. Android OS development seems to miss a crucial step, step one is add a feature to the OS but then step two, the missing step, is actually load the OS on devices that people actually use.

Tony, sometimes your extreme bias is funny, and sometimes its pathetic... Today you have achieved the latter. One of your poorest attempts to spin in quite a while. Better luck skewing things in the next article.

Meanwhile Google is still charging ahead while Apple continues to regurgitate the same product from 2007.

quote: Perhaps the 'slew of innovative things' will be just for the those running the latest version 4 of Android, Jelly Bean, which has been out for nearly a year now and is only on a laughable 28% of Android devices. Android OS development seems to miss a crucial step, step one is add a feature to the OS but then step two, the missing step, is actually load the OS on devices that people actually use.

So, apparently you're too (insert something mildly degrading) to understand how hardware life cycles work. When you hit a major release point when continuously developing a kernel and an operating system on top of that, you test/validate it against the cutting edge hardware first and ensure it'll work on up and coming hardware. you then start to push it out to other devices that just came out as you most likely tested it on that hardware too as the release candidate was most likely in development for about a year or so(depending on the OS). older hardware is less of a concern as the older the hardware, the closer it is to hitting end of life and it generally already has a stable OS supporting it. This is how LITERALLY EVERY OS PLATFORM ON THE PLANET WORKS!!! The only exception, is how apple "updates" old hardware(phone and pc line). When apple "updates" old hardware to the newer version of the OS, it, in all cases, neuters the hardware and renders the device nearly unusable. Rather than keep the device on a stable, decent performing OS, they push the new OS to the old hardware. This is bad(I shouldn't have to say it, but you have the attention span of my 2 1/2 year old). So, rather than not get the new OS and risk turning your phone FUBAR, google doesn't develop their kernel to run gimped on old ass hardware. The crap you question is similar to " well microsoft just released windows 8, so it should run on my pentium 200 that's been around for 16 years? Sure, i won't get any of the features because of the hardware constraints, but i should have it on my hardware so i can brag about having my version number be different.!!!!

I'm done.

(waiting for the incoming retort about apple's profit or some other crap no one cares about)

a) Not getting OS updates doesn't matter and is a feature not a bug of the Android OS ecosystem.

b) The Android operating system is charging ahead even though no significant OS upgrades or changes were announced at the recent Google IO.

c) The wonderful innovation on the Android platform really has a big impact on users and the world in general even though it takes years (years!) for the latest version of the Android OS to get onto a significant proportion of Android devices

d) Even though Google announced nothing of consequence for the Android OS at the recent IO and even though Apple's WWDC event, at which the new version of iOS will be showcased for the first, has not yet taken place you absolutely know for a fact that Google's amazing (invisible) innovation of the Android OS trumps Apple's (not yet announced) innovation of iOS.

I see you guys are still struggling with the harsh realities of the AppleSung world.

Sorry Tony, you have failed again. You are trying to marginalize Android's amazing 2 year run of worst to first development by throwing in older low end phones that didnt get the updates and it just doesnt fly.

a - no, that was you changing the subject. Its not Androids strongpoint as a platform for obvious reasons. Most high end Androids get updated, its the low end that doesnt and its improved greatly over the last year. Dont forget, you arent dealing with one phone from one maker with marginal improvements, you are dealing with a different beast. Androids strength is is flexibility. If OS updates are your bag and you arent technical enough to do it yourself, then Nexus devices get you there.

b - Yes, we are referring to the past 2 years and how Android is firing on all pistons. Google said prior to the show that Android 5 is about ready, but they are holding off to polish it and give manufacturers time to catch up and get ROM's ready to avoid the lack of update impression at or near release.

c - Again, see a above. If you bought a low end phone over a year ago you probably arent getting the latest. Your high end phone will. Really not an issue as you make it out to be.

d - That is just looking at Apple's history. It hasnt change much at all since IOS3. OS I6 should really be called 3.3. If OS7 somehow comes out with far more of an improvement than 3-6 then fine, we will see but there is no reason to suspect that to be true. So far all we are hearing is that they are copying WP8's flat interface. But if you want to hang your hat on your OS version and forget what it actually does for you then go right ahead.

Or, he just ignores the post and moves on to something else. Last week sometime, I showed him links proving IOS has malware after he claims IOS get none and Android has it all, he ignored it and hasn't responded. When he is wrong, he just flat out refuses to respond or switches to something else. It's his standard MO.

Its funny how you keep having conversations no-one else is having. Even in your reply you quoted the guy sarcastically saying "waiting for the incoming retort about apple's profit or some other crap no one cares about"

You then proceed to ask which company is doing better financially. No-one was asking. He was even making fun of you for countering technical issues with "Apple makes more money" and you STILL came out with "Apple makes more money" as your comeback. The conversation had nothing to do with money, other than him making fun of you because he knew you would go there. LOL.

You are really slipping old man. You used to put up more of a debate, now its just silly. I am wondering, are you slipping after years and years of the same exact talking points, or are your talking points losing more and more merit every year as the world passes Apple by as Apple sits idle. Perhaps both.

Anyhow, when you go to buy a product, do you seriously evaluate which product makes more money for the company or which company makes more money overall? I would really hope you evaluate which product does the most for you and not the company that makes it... Never mind. Look who I am talking to. You just by the Apple product regardless.

quote: John Kirk John R. Kirk is a recovering attorney. He has also worked as a financial advisor and a business coach. His love affair with computing started with his purchase of the original Mac in 1985 . His primary interest is the field of personal computing (which includes phones, tablets, notebooks and desktops) and his primary focus is on long-term business strategies: What makes a company unique; How do those unique qualities aid or inhibit the success of the company; and why don’t (or can’t) other companies adopt the successful attributes of their competitors? - See more at: http://techpinions.com/androids-market-share-is-li...

Tells me all I need to know about him. Gotta love BIAS authors. Tony seems to be able to sniff them out like a dog sniffs his own ass.

Yup... "My point is weak, so let me change the subject to finance and then post a link to an article with an opinion/bias just like mine... That will show 'em". I dont get what he is trying to prove. Apple makes money? I think we all know that.

"Tony seems to be able to sniff them out like a dog sniffs his own ass."

I wouldn't necessarily skewer someone because their first computer was an Apple.

My first computer was a Commodore 64. Then I got an Amiga 500...and then my first 486sx PC. Which, naturally, I took apart to see if I could put it back together ;)

Beyond that, I took my first computer classes when I was in 5th grade...on Apple IIs. I completed all of the coursework there was for all grades through high school in one semester. When I got into HS, our lab was all Apple IIs still. With one IBM clone that no one knew what to do with. My HS programming work was on the Apple IIs. Didn't get that first PC until I was in my 3rd year of college.

So all in all, I was as primed as anybody to be a lifelong Apple fan. But if you've paid attention, you've probably guessed that I'm not. I'm also not giving Microsoft any free passes either...which you've noticed lately especially around Win8 if you've paid attention.

All of which I only bring up because you can't simply point at someone's first computer as being indicative of how they're going to be for the rest of their lives.

And normally I wouldn't if it wasn't the same lame bullshit trolling verbal diarrhea that Tony spews daily, most of the tripe he posts only serves to purpose his agenda. All he is here to do is prop up his employer.

There are many many more significant reasons HTC is having problems then a patent suit in one of the markets.

Also, AMD's Intel problem is not the main, or even one of the significant reasons that AMD is in trouble.

AMD's marketshare was low with superior products because their volumes couldn't match Intel's, not because Intel bribed everybody. Also, it is not that AMD had so breathtaking CPUs in the early to mid 2000s but rather that Intel had crap ones. That's why Intel was able to comfortably jump ahead again with a return to their old architecture features, which they were, by the way, developing all along with Banias, Dothan and Yonah.

HTC also had problems with the handsets in question in all markets, not just the one. And it's by no significant means anybody's fault but their own.

It's not because of the removable battery nor the AMOLED. The average consumer doesn't know/care about those features. And remember, we are not the "average" consumer. The reason I know this is because of friends that work in the business. The average customer walking into the AT&T store doesn't care about 1080p screens nor Snapdragon processors. They either want (a) to pay as little as possible, or (b) go by what their friends own or what they've heard is a good product. They don't read countless reviews on the web, let alone 10 page reviews on Anandtech and other similar sites.

In the end Samsung's meteoric rise is due to their huge allocation of funds towards marketing. Same with Apple.

And the lack of marketing is why I'm guessing that the marketing folks from HTC were let go. I don't even recall hearing/seeing any ads for HTC in the past couple years except for the Beats addon.

Yeah and your full of it. I can't count the number of times I've read someone state this, in clear terms, that a removable battery is a MUST in a phone.

And sure, people may not care about AMOLED as a technology, but they sure like the way Samsung calibrates it. And even if you don't "care" about 1080p, your friggin eyes sure know it looks good when you see it!

quote: They either want (a) to pay as little as possible, or (b) go by what their friends own or what they've heard is a good product.

LMAO ok, got a survey to back that up? Brand recognition isn't even on your list?

quote: In the end Samsung's meteoric rise is due to their huge allocation of funds towards marketing. Same with Apple.

But nothing to do with the actual product? It's just all marketing? Yeeeah put down the Haterade.

Anyone who has ever owned portable products - cameras, phones, laptops, shavers - knows that batteries go bad. Easy replacement is a must for many people, and the S4 is the only high end phone providing it.

You don't even need to have heard of AMOLED to be attracted by it. You pull out your current phone, see bright colors and punchy contrast on an S4, and think "wow, that's a nice screen".

I don't know why you think someone needs to read a bunch of reviews or be an advanced buyer to understand these two exceedingly simple points.

Does Samsung have good marketing? Of course. But make something that checks all the boxes at a good price and you can succeed even without it. Look at Vizio's HDTV success.

Sorry I didn't word it correctly. I mean that it's a failure because the market doesn't seem to want it. I see nothing wrong with the phone itself. It's a bit generic looking compared to other HTC models for WP8 or android. But there are easily cheap crappy phones on the market.

Also, considering the Facebook UI has been available for a while which can be installed on any phone, yet nobody seems to care... Not a good sign.

Jason,Can you expand on the non sourced "issues" of the black One? A Google search revealed nothing and I'm in possession of a 2 day old One in black.This is the only thing I found which indicates HTC did a fine job on the anodization process.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWqPpYVE08&featur...

that Eric Lin sounds like an ass for posting that.. as product strategy manager, he most likely has part responsibility on the downfall by making wrong product strategy decision. now he just jump ship and tell everyone at HTC to jump too.

John. you think Edward`s storry is astonishing, I just received a gorgeous Mitsubishi Evo since I been bringin in $4794 this-past/month and-over, 10/k this past-month. it's certainly the easiest-work I have ever done. I started this 5 months ago and almost immediately started making a nice minimum $71... per/hr. I went to this website,,Exit35.comCHECK IT OUT

If you think Lois`s story is amazing,, last munth my cousins best friend also made $4013 grafting 20 hour's a week from there apartment and the're buddy's sister-in-law`s neighbour has been doing this for four months and got paid more than $4013 part time on line. applie the steps on this link, Exit35.comCHECK IT OUT

just before I looked at the bank draft that said $4668, I did not believe ...that...my neighbour had been realey bringing home money part time from there computar.. there brothers friend had bean doing this 4 less than 14 months and a short time ago paid for the morgage on there appartment and bought a great new Citro?n DS. go to, Exit35.comCHECK IT OUT

"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)